The purpose of
this site is for information and a record of Gerry McCann's Blog
Archives. As most people will appreciate GM deleted all past blogs
from the official website. Hopefully this Archive will be helpful to
anyone who is interested in Justice for Madeleine Beth McCann. Many
Thanks, Pamalam

Note: This site does not belong to the McCanns. It belongs to Pamalam. If
you wish to contact the McCanns directly, please use
the contact/email details
campaign@findmadeleine.com

The debate about Leveson's key proposals and how they may, or may not be, enforced continues...

11 February 2013: Gerry McCann delivers the keynote speech at the Hacked Off conference on the Leveson
Bill and warns the Prime Minister that a "permanent stain" would be left on the Government's record if it fails
to reform the press.

17 February 2013: The McCanns are interviewed on BBC One's Andrew Marr
Show, by Radio Four presenter Eddie Mair, and decry the Royal Charter press regulation 'compromise'.

Gerry McCann calls for press control laws
– and 75% of the public agree, 09 February 2013

Gerry McCann calls for press control laws – and
75% of the public agree The Guardian

Poll shows overwhelming support for missing Madeleine's father on how Leveson inquiry findings must be enforced

Gerry McCann is to reveal on Monday that he and his wife, Kate, fear
they have "relived our darkest days" needlessly in the vain hope that new legislation would be introduced to control
the press.

"Leveson without the law is meaningless," the father of missing Madeleine McCann will tell
a Westminster audience at a conference for politicians and the victims of media intrusion.

His speech, which will
call for speedy legislation to implement the recommendations made by Lord Justice Leveson at the end of his nine-month inquiry,
comes in the wake of a poll seen by the Observer showing that almost three-quarters of the public agree with him.

Conducted by YouGov for the Media Standards Trust, the poll also indicates an even bigger proportion – 83% –
want more distance between politicians and the media, or at least greater transparency about the relationship, while another
substantial majority would like immediate government action to control the press.

McCann will address hacking victims
and members of parliament, expected to include culture secretary Maria Miller, at the Hacked Off Victims Conference.

"Kate and I had the misfortune to suffer from everything the press could throw at us," the doctor will tell his
audience.

"The reason we subsequently agreed to the ordeal of giving evidence to the Leveson inquiry was that
we don't want anyone else to have to go through what we went through.

"The Leveson package, including
legal underpinning, is the minimum acceptable compromise for us and, judging by the polls, for the public at large. Leveson
without the law is meaningless."

Supporters of the campaign group Hacked Off, including Charlotte Church,
Hugh Grant and the falsely accused Bristol teacher Christopher Jefferies, believe the government has blocked parliamentary
attempts to enact the recommendations of the inquiry report.

"When the prime minister promised to protect
those who have been 'picked up and thrown to the wolves' by this process, we hoped for real change," McCann will
say.

"The idea that Kate and myself, and the other victims, might have relived our darkest days in the full
glare of the media for no good reason is just galling."

The YouGov poll found that, like McCann, 73% of the
2,030 adults surveyed last month would have "not much" or "no" confidence in a new system of voluntary
press regulation with no legal backing. And 73% of respondents also said they believe that meetings between politicians and
senior media figures should be made public, while only 10% said they should not.

The Media Standards Trust, a charity
lobbying for reform and press accountability, believes the poll gives more weight to the argument that the government has
now consulted widely enough. The poll the trust commissioned shows that 64% of those asked favour the introduction of a new
regulatory system within 12 months or sooner.

"This poll shows that the public overwhelmingly support implementation
of Leveson, and do not have confidence in a system set up by the press without proper independent oversight. There's a
real fear that, if things do not change substantially, the same illegal and unethical practices will recur," said the
director of the Media Standards Trust, Dr Martin Moore.

"The public also want politicians to become a lot
more transparent, and not revert to the cosy relationships they enjoyed before the Leveson inquiry."

Supporters
of press legislation took heart last Tuesday when peers unexpectedly passed an amendment to the Defamation bill to introduce
one of Leveson's key recommendations – a simple arbitration service between newspapers and those who feel wronged.

Use of an arbitration service would be voluntary and form part of the newspaper industry's own self-regulatory
system, but the amendment would allow courts to vary costs and damages depending on whether the service has been used.

MPs and ministers who do not wish to accept the Lords amendment will now have to overturn the planned legislation
in the Commons.

Meanwhile, the chair of the Press Complaints Commission, Lord Hunt of Wirral, is meeting newspaper
editors to decide how to respond to the recent changes to the bill.

Campaigners for statutory underpinning will
hold a conference in Westminster tomorrow when Gerry McCann will tell ministers that "Leveson without the law is meaningless".

Mr McCann, father of missing Madeleine McCann, will say:

"Kate
and I had the misfortune to suffer from everything the press could throw at us.

The Leveson package, including
the legal underpinning, is the minimum acceptable compromise for us, and judging by the polls, for the public at large too.
Leveson without the law is meaningless.

When the Prime Minister promised to protect those who have been 'picked
up and thrown to the wolves' by this process, we hoped for real change.

The idea that Kate and myself, and
the other victims, might have relived our darkest days in the full glare of the media, for no good reason, is just galling."

- GERRY MCCANN

-----------------

Over
half of voters think press regulation should be backed by law ITV News

More than half of voters think a new
system of press regulation should be backed by law, according to a poll Credit: Dan Kitwood/PA Wire/Press Association Images10 February 2013

More than half of voters think a new
system of press regulation should be backed by law, according to a poll published today.

53% of poll respondents
felt that statute was necessary if the new regime was to be effective and independent, while 23% thought legal backing would
put at risk the freedom of the press, the YouGov survey for the Media Standards Trust found.

Almost three quarters
(74%) said that Lord Justice Leveson's proposals for reform should be implemented.

However, over half of respondents
said they had followed the issue either "not very closely" or "not at all".

Gerry McCann: 'Leveson without the law
is meaningless', 11 February 2013

Madeleine McCann's father will challenge ministers today to ensure a new system of press regulation is
backed by law.

Gerry McCann, who was paid damages by several newspapers over reporting of the case of his missing
daughter, will say he and his wife Kate "had the misfortune to suffer from everything the press could throw at us".

McCann, whose three-year-old daughter vanished from a Portuguese holiday apartment in May 2007, will add: "The
reason we subsequently agreed to the ordeal of giving evidence to the Leveson Inquiry was that we don't want anyone else
to have to go through what we went through.

"The Leveson package, including the legal underpinning, is the
minimum acceptable compromise for us, and judging by the polls, for the public at large too. Leveson without the law is meaningless.

"When the Prime Minister promised to protect those who have been 'picked up and thrown to the wolves'
by this process, we hoped for real change.

"The idea that Kate and myself, and the other victims, might have
relived our darkest days in the full glare of the media, for no good reason, is just galling."

McCann will
speak out after a new poll indicated that most voters are in favour of statutory backing for a new press regulator, as recommended
by Lord Justice Leveson in his report on the press.

Some 53 per cent felt statute was necessary if the new
regime was to be effective and independent, while 23 per cent thought legal backing would put at risk the freedom of the press,
the YouGov survey for the Media Standards Trust found.

Asked whether Lord Justice Leveson's proposals for reform
should be implemented, almost three-quarters (74 per cent) said they should while 9 per cent said they should not.

However, more than half of respondents said they had followed the issue either "not very closely" or "not
at all".

The poll was released as the Government prepares to publish a draft Royal Charter this week that
ministers want to use instead of legislation.

David Cameron has set his face against using statute to underpin
regulation, arguing that it would "cross the Rubicon" after centuries of press freedom.

The YouGov poll
showed that only 35 per cent of voters would have confidence in a new regulator that was backed by Royal Charter. A regulator
set up by the Government - rather than the newspapers - and backed by law would have the confidence of 54 per cent.

McCann will be keynote speaker at a conference in Westminster today where victims of media intrusion will be joined by shadow
culture secretary Harriet Harman and Liberal Democrat Justice Minister Lord McNally.

Culture Secretary Maria Miller
has also been invited to the event, organised by the campaign group Hacked Off.

'Leveson without the law is meaningless'
- Gerry McCann, 11 February 2013

Gerry McCann will step up the pressure on MPs today to create a new press regulator
with statutory underpinning.

The father of the missing girl, Madeleine McCann, is set to tell a Westminster conference
organised by the campaigning group Hacked Off that "Leveson without the law is meaningless."

According
to an advance release of his speech, McCann will say: "The Leveson package, including the legal underpinning, is the
minimum acceptable compromise for us, and judging by the polls, for the public at large too."

The poll he
refers to was conducted by YouGov for the Media Standards Trust (which is linked to Hacked Off). It found that 53% of respondents
believe statute is necessary to make the regulator effective and independent, and just 23% think statutory underpinning will
put at risk the freedom of the press.

Asked whether Leveson's recommendations should be implemented in full,
74% said they should compared to 9% who said they should not.

The poll also indicates an even bigger proportion
– 83% – want more distance between politicians and the media, or at least greater transparency about the relationship.
(I have no details as yet of the sample and how it was conducted).

But it should be noted that more than
half of all respondents said they had followed the issue either "not very closely" or "not at all".

In his keynote speech, McCann is expected to say:

"Kate and I had the misfortune
to suffer from everything the press could throw at us. The reason we subsequently agreed to the ordeal of giving evidence
to the Leveson inquiry was that we don't want anyone else to have to go through what we went through.

The idea
that Kate and myself, and the other victims, might have relived our darkest days in the full glare of the media, for no good
reason, is just galling.

When the prime minister promised to protect those who have been 'picked up and thrown
to the wolves' by this process, we hoped for real change."

Gerry and Kate McCann were paid damages
by several newspapers guilty of gross misreporting following the disappearance in Portugal of their three year-old daughter
in May 2007.

Other victims of media intrusion will be joined at Westminster the by shadow culture secretary, Harriet
Harman, and the Lib-Dem justice minister Lord McNally.

David Cameron has made clear his opposition to statutory
underpinning of a new regulator, arguing that it would "cross the Rubicon" after centuries of press freedom.Sources:The Observer/msn news/Press Gazette

Leveson without the law is no change –
Dr Gerry McCann, 11 February 2013

Posted February 11th, 2013 by Hacked
OffToday, at the Hacked Off conference on the Leveson Bill, Dr Gerry McCann gave the
keynote speech on where we are now, two and a half months after Lord Justice Leveson published his recommendations on press
regulation. This is his speech in full.

Good afternoon, Ladies and Gentlemen.

I don't
often find myself making speeches at events like this. But I'm happy to do so for Hacked Off, because I passionately believe
in the cause. And now is a critical time for the campaign.

We are at a crossroads. In one direction, the prospect
of lasting change to the failed system of press regulation, based on the painstaking work of Lord Justice Leveson. In the
other, attempts to brush the problem under the carpet – to create a fix – so that nothing really changes.

Our elected politicians face a critical choice. They can either do what Leveson recommends – wholeheartedly and properly
– or they can turn their backs on the issue, and turn their backs on us, the victims of press abuse.

Kate
and I had the misfortune to suffer the worst that the press could throw at us.

• We were labelled as murderers
without a shred of evidence.

• Stories were published saying our daughter was dead – over and over again,
with no evidence.

• We were subjected to round-the-clock intrusion at a time of terrible stress, with photographers
camped outside our door.

• We were intimidated. Our young children, especially, were scared out of their wits.

• My wife's private diary, revealing her innermost thoughts in her darkest days, was published without her
consent.

• Rumours were dressed up as the truth

• and downright lies became front-page news.
One newspaper claimed that we sold Madeleine into slavery in order to pay off our mortgage.

The slurs went on for
months - despite our best efforts: Meetings with editors, assurances from our lawyers, a letter from the chief constable of
Leicestershire police calling for restraint- all ignored. And they continued for the simple reason that there was no-one and
nothing with the power to stop them.

People say: 'Your experience was so unusual, we can't draw any lessons
from it.' Well I disagree. Our experience was extreme, but it was a consequence of the same sick culture that led to the
abuse of many other people, some of whom are here in this room today.

An insatiable hunt for headlines combined
with a total lack of respect for other people. The mentality that can turn a family's distress into cold, hard cash. Profit
from misery.

In our case it led to the sacrifice, not only of the truth, but of our dignity, privacy, well-being
and most importantly the search for our missing daughter, Madeleine.

I believe we have a responsibility, as decent
citizens in a democratic and caring society, to learn lessons from it.

The parliamentary select committee on the
media said in 2010:

"The newspaper industry's assertion that the McCann case is a one-off event shows
that it is in denial about the scale and gravity of what went wrong and about the need to learn from those mistakes. The industry's
words and actions suggest a desire to bury the affair without confronting its serious implications, the kind of avoidance
which newspapers would criticise mercilessly and rightly if it occurred in any other part of society."

Three
years later, I see little remorse, no contrition. Sections of the press are still in denial. The sick culture has not changed,
and they can't be trusted to change it of their own accord.

If you look at the reporting of the Leveson Inquiry
and the behaviour of some newspapers since then, it's clear that they aren't sorry and they still think they should
not have to answer to anyone when they publish harmful lies and distortions.

The reason Kate and I put ourselves
through the ordeal of giving evidence to Leveson was simple: Nobody should have to endure what we went through. A system has
to be put in place to protect ordinary people from the devastating damage that the media can cause.

When David
Cameron set up the Leveson Inquiry he said in parliament: "We must keep the public – and the victims of what has
now emerged – front and centre at all times." And he also said: "We will have to be guided by what the inquiry
finds."

When he gave his own evidence to the Leveson inquiry he promised to protect the people who have been
thrown to the wolves as we were. We saw this as grounds for hope that we'd see real change.

What Lord Leveson
proposed last November is not tough on the press and it's not a threat to free speech. For me personally, he did not go
far enough. It seems to me that the judge did everything he could to make his proposals workable for the newspapers while
giving the public some protection.

In the end they get to regulate themselves, which is something very few industries
are allowed to do, and which many people felt they had lost the right to do so.

For us and for other victims of
press abuses, Leveson's proposal is the minimum acceptable compromise – and, judging by the opinion polls, the public
feels the same way.

But what has happened? Two and a half months on we can see precious little progress towards
implementation of Leveson, and we are hearing backsliding words from politicians. This is an opportunity for our elected MP's,
whose reputation with the British public is at an all time low, to redeem themselves. The Leveson report is not something
to be negotiated with their friends in the press. Any watering down of the Leveson plan now, whether in a Bill or a Royal
Charter or whatever, would be like surrendering to the press and saying the whole Leveson process was a waste of time.

And the idea that Kate and I, and all those other victims, might have relived our darkest days in the full glare of
the media, for no good reason, is offensive. If our testimony was in vain, it will be a permanent stain on the reputation
of this Government, and I believe that many other families will pay a heavy price in press mistreatment.

Sometimes
it seems as if our politicians just don't know what the right thing to do is. Just like in the past, they seem to be so
compromised by their own relationships with the press that they are unable to see what needs to be done for the sake of the
public. And that is exactly what the newspapers want. They want politicians to squabble and manoeuvre, so that they get to
carry on business as usual. They need a compliant Government to tiptoe around them and avoid hurting their feelings.

It's obvious that no one wants the Government to shackle the press. What we all want is a free press –indeed Leveson
would enshrine it- but we need a free press which is both responsible and accountable- two values which are in short supply.
So that if the press trample on people, they have some remedy.

We need a proper watchdog whose independence and
effectiveness is guaranteed. That is what Leveson recommends. He says the press can regulate themselves, on condition that
their regulator meets some basic standards. He says what those standards are, and he says there must be an independent body
that checks those standards are met. He says that it is essential - not desirable, ESSENTIAL - that the body carrying out
the checks is set up in statute, though it must be completely free of political influence after that.

Considering
what the press has been doing to people, they should see that as a good deal. All the polls show that is what the public thinks.
And it looks as though most parliamentarians think that too.

Leveson without the law is no change. It's the
PCC all over again. It's the world we know, of newspapers abusing innocent families with impunity. What happened to us
would happen to other British families in the future.

It is up to our Prime Minister and our other politicians
to prevent that. He promised he would. To keep his promise, all he has to do is follow what Leveson said, and put the Leveson
recommendations into law through parliament, without meddling and back-door deals. And without checking whether the press
is happy about it.

There can't be any half measures or compromises. Leveson made many concessions to the press
so his recommendations are already a compromise. In fact they are the minimum acceptable compromise for the people who, in
the Prime Minister's words, were "picked up and thrown to the wolves." That is us. That is Kate and I, and some
of the people in this room, and many other people around the country.

I said at the beginning that we are at a
crossroads. Please, this time, let's choose the right road.

Gerry McCann warns David Cameron over 'permanent
stain' to Government record if Leveson inquiry recommendations do not become law, 11 February 2013

Gerry McCann warns David Cameron over 'permanent stain'
to Government record if Leveson inquiry recommendations do not become law The Independent

Campaign group Hacked Off 'given little encouragement' that proposals would be implemented
in full

Ian Burrell, Assistant Editor and Media Editor of The IndependentMonday 11 February
2013

The father of Madeleine McCann this afternoon warned the Prime Minister
that a "permanent stain" would be left on the Government's record if it failed to reform the press after making
the parents of the missing child relive their nightmare in public at the Leveson inquiry.

Gerry McCann spoke of
his fears that David Cameron, who will tomorrow unveil plans for a Royal Charter on the regulation of the press, was preparing
to water down the proposals of an inquiry which he set up himself. "If our testimony was in vain it would be a permanent
stain on the reputation of this government," he said.

Addressing a briefing called by the press reform group
Hacked Off, Mr McCann described how he and his wife Kate had been harassed by newspapers which he said made "profit from
misery".

He said: "To keep his promises all he has to do is follow what Leveson said and put the Leveson
recommendations into law through parliament without meddling in back door dealing and without checking that the press is happy
with it."

Brian Cathcart, director of Hacked Off, told the meeting that he had just come from a meeting with
the Prime Minister at Downing Street at which had been given little encouragement that Lord Justice Leveson's proposals
would be implemented in full. "We had no reassurance from the Prime Minister," he said. "There seemed to be,
in his language, compromises with the press."

Mr Cathcart said he had been "non-plussed" to arrive
at Downing Street and see Paul Dacre, editor-in-chief of the Daily Mail, emerging from his own meeting with Mr Cameron.

After publication of the Leveson report in November, Mr Cameron said that introducing regulation with underpinning
in law would amount to the crossing of a "Rubicon" in Britain's long history of a free press. A Royal Charter
is seen by the Conservatives as a viable way of introducing the judge's proposals without use of statute.

The
Hacked Off meeting was attended by shadow Culture Secretary Harriet Harman, who said that the Conservatives would be made
to introduce the Leveson recommendations because there was overwhelming support for the full report in Parliament.

The government minister Lord McNally, a Liberal Democrat, warned the press over its negative coverage of the process for
introducing Leveson’s ideas, saying "they may end up with something far, far worse than what is now contemplated".

Hacked Off and father of missing girl Madeleine voice concerns after meeting with David Cameron over press regulation

Lisa O'CarrollMonday 11 February 2013 16.52 GMT

Gerry McCann, father of missing girl Madeleine, has said the
"sick culture" that led to his family being accused of murdering their own daughter to pay off their mortgage still
exists in the UK press.

McCann on Monday afternoon laid down the gauntlet to prime minister David Cameron, calling
on him to deliver the promise he made during and after the Leveson inquiry to "protect the people who have been thrown
to the wolves as we were".

McCann was taking part in a press conference organised by Hacked Off, the group
campaigning for stricter press regulation, on the eve of the first publication of No 10's plans for a new regulator backed
by royal charter.

Representatives of Hacked Off called the briefing following a meeting with Cameron on Monday
morning and said they were "not encouraged" by what they heard, fearing the prime minister is about to water down
proposals to tighten up regulation of the press.

They fear that Cameron is surrendering to press interests, noting
that the editor of the Daily Mail and the editor of the Financial Times were leaving Downing Street as they arrived.

McCann said he was not reassured by what he believed to be "backsliding words from politicians" and warned that
any dilution of promises to protect innocent people from abuses by the media would be like "surrendering to the press
and saying the whole Leveson process was a waste of time".

He added that Cameron owed it to "victims"
of press intrusion like him to put a system in place "to protect ordinary people from the devastating damage that the
media can cause".

No family should have to endure what his did, McCann said, recalling how he and his wife
had been "labelled as murderers without a shred of evidence", that newspapers had reported their daughter was dead
"over and over again, with no evidence", and one newspaper even claimed "that we sold Madeleine into slavery
in order to pay off our mortgage".

He said he believed "the sick culture" on some newspapers that
led to this "has not changed", adding: "Three years later, I see little remorse, no contrition. Sections of
the press are still in denial."

McCann said the minimum Cameron must do to ensure this never happens again
is implement the Leveson proposals for press regulation reform.

In their meeting with Cameron, Hacked Off representatives
said they received no assurances that their proposals for a new watchdog would offer the robust and independent regulation
that Leveson recommended.

The prime minister is set to publish the Conservative party's full proposals, including
plans for a royal charter to establish a new press regulator, on Tuesday afternoon.

Brian Cathcart, director of
Hacked Off, said he was "surprised" to hear from Cameron that the press may have a role in the appointments process
in relation to the new watchdog.

"The prime minister gave us no reassurances about the idea that this body
would be appointed in an independent and transparent way," Cathcart added.

He said Hacked Off was given "no
encouragement" about the statutory framework that would ensure a press regulatory, established by royal charter, would
be free of interference from government ministers on the privy council.

"He didn't dispute press reports
this morning that there was no statutory protection for the royal charter preventing it being amended," said Evan Harris,
associate director of Hacked Off.

Deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman, who attended the Hacked Off press conference,
said she believed that if Cameron did not deliver on the Leveson proposals, parliament would. She noted that he had "no
mandate" to implement a watered-down press watchdog.

Lord McNally, leader of the Liberal Democrats in the
House of Lords, said a tripartite solution was the only one. "If we are doing to get the this fish in the bowl, you have
to have three-party agreement," he said.

Leveson inquiry: it's deadline day,
as Gerry McCann warns of 'permanent stain' to Government record if recommendations do not become law, 11 February
2013

Leveson inquiry: it's deadline day, as Gerry McCann
warns of 'permanent stain' to Government record if recommendations do not become law The Independent

Campaign group Hacked Off 'given little encouragement' that proposals would be implemented
in full

Ian Burrell, Assistant Editor and Media Editor of The IndependentMonday 11 February
2013

Option 2 - The royal Charter: David Cameron and Oliver Letwin support it

The father of Madeleine McCann this afternoon warned the Prime
Minister that a "permanent stain" would be left on the Government's record if it failed to reform the press
after making the parents of the missing child relive their nightmare in public at the Leveson inquiry.

Gerry McCann
spoke of his fears that David Cameron, who will tomorrow unveil plans for a Royal Charter on the regulation of the press,
was preparing to water down the proposals of an inquiry which he set up himself. "If our testimony was in vain it would
be a permanent stain on the reputation of this government," he said.

Addressing a briefing called by the press
reform group Hacked Off, Mr McCann described how he and his wife Kate had been harassed by newspapers which he said made "profit
from misery".

He said: "To keep his promises all he has to do is follow what Leveson said and put the
Leveson recommendations into law through parliament without meddling in back door dealing and without checking that the press
is happy with it."

Brian Cathcart, director of Hacked Off, told the meeting that he had just come from a meeting
with the Prime Minister at Downing Street at which had been given little encouragement that Lord Justice Leveson's proposals
would be implemented in full. "We had no reassurance from the Prime Minister," he said. "There seemed to be,
in his language, compromises with the press."

Mr Cathcart said he had been "non-plussed" to arrive
at Downing Street and see Paul Dacre, editor-in-chief of the Daily Mail, emerging from his own meeting with Mr Cameron.

After publication of the Leveson report in November, Mr Cameron said that introducing regulation with underpinning
in law would amount to the crossing of a "Rubicon" in Britain's long history of a free press. A Royal Charter
is seen by the Conservatives as a viable way of introducing the judge's proposals without use of statute.

The
Hacked Off meeting was attended by shadow Culture Secretary Harriet Harman, who said that the Conservatives would be made
to introduce the Leveson recommendations because there was overwhelming support for the full report in Parliament.

The government minister Lord McNally, a Liberal Democrat, warned the press over its negative coverage of the process for
introducing Leveson's ideas, saying "they may end up with something far, far worse than what is now contemplated".

Option 1: Leveson in full

What does it involve?

To the
victims of press intrusion, such as Gerry McCann, the judge's report and its call for an independent regulatory body set
up in statute was the bare minimum required to reform a press that was out of control. Lord Justice Leveson said it should
have the power to investigate serious breaches and sanction newspapers, with an arbitration system to allow people to avoid
the courts.

Labour agreed and Ed Miliband has demanded that Leveson be implemented in full, even drawing up a draft
bill and giving the Prime Minister a Christmas deadline to implement the proposals. But he has so far failed to act on the
threats despite the support of a clear majority in the House of Commons.

Despite the passing of the deadline, Labour's
draft bill, designed to show how easily statutory underpinning could be introduced, has not been put before the House.

Last week the Labour peer Lord Puttnam reflected a growing sense of impatience on the backbenches when he –
along with allies from other parties – made amendments to the Defamation Bill, incorporating some of Leveson's more
radical proposals, and won an emphatic majority.Who supports it?

Hugh Grant, Harriet
Harman and Lord Puttnam – as well as plenty of phone-hacking victims.Chances of success?

Odds are lengthening – but if the three parties fail to reach a compromise deal, there is support in Westminster for
this option to solve the impasse.

Option 2: the royal charter

What does
it involve?

Within minutes of Lord Justice Leveson's report being published in November, David Cameron
made clear that he, like the newspaper industry, believed that any statutory involvement in the press was a step too far.
It would "mean for the first time we have crossed the Rubicon of writing elements of press regulation into law of the
land".

Downing Street immediately set civil servants and Government lawyers the task of finding a way to implement
Leveson without using legislation. The Royal Charter was a device seized upon by Policy Minister Oliver Letwin. right, and
triumphantly leaked a week after publication of the Leveson Report. It was a "sensible halfway solution," a Tory
source assured the Daily Telegraph at the time.

Yet some press organisations immediately saw a Royal Charter as
even less preferable to statutory underpinning because it would mean that power over the recognition body rested with the
Privy Council – effectively the Cabinet.

For the past two months, the Tories have been trying, during cross
party talks, to win a consensus for the Royal Charter but have struggled to publish a draft of what they have in mind. The
public will finally get to see a document today.Who supports it?

Oliver Letwin and
David Cameron, crucially.Chances of success?

Currently it is in pole position, but
it's success would be dependent on private horse-trading with the Liberal Democrats and especially Labour.

Option 3: do nothing

What does it involve?

Since the publication of Leveson
at the end of November, representatives of the newspaper industry have been meeting in private to incorporate the judge's
proposals into a new self-regulatory system that might be acceptable to Parliament and an angry public.

They have
been at pains to say publicly that they largely favour the judge's recommended reforms. But as they have lobbied behind
the scenes, some papers have argued that all the essential elements of Leveson can be introduced into a new self-regulatory
system with no need for political involvement at all.

They regard any element of statute as anathema and see the
Royal Charter plan as potentially giving politicians even more power.Who supports it?

Some of the biggest publishers in Fleet Street.Chances of Success?

Less than slim
– even David Cameron recognises that the new watchdog will need some form of oversight.

David Cameron rejects call for press
regulator to have statutory backing, 12 February 2013

David Cameron rejects call for press regulator to have
statutory backing The Guardian

Political wrangling looms as Tories suggest post-Leveson watchdog should be established by royal charter, not legislation

Lisa O'CarrollTuesday 12 February 2013 16.48 GMT

David Cameron has rejected calls to reconsider introducing statutory
underpinning for a new press regulator after two months of behind-the-scene deliberations with legal and policy advisers.

A new press watchdog proposed on Tuesday by the Conservative party in the wake of the Leveson report would be established
by a royal charter but it will not be backed by new legislation.

The long-awaited detailed proposals for press
regulation come two months after the prime minister said that a Leveson law would "cross a Rubicon" and end centuries
of press freedom.

Maria Miller, the culture secretary, told Sky News: "We do not want to have a press law."
She said she hoped the "certainty" the Labour party was looking from for the press regulator can be achieved through
the royal charter body.

The Labour party, which called for Leveson to be implemented in full when the report was
published in November appears to have softened its position. Deputy leader Harriet Harman said she was concerned that ministers,
through the Privy Council, could amend the royal charter at any time, but if the Tories changed this, "there might be
a prospect of agreement". She told BBC News that if the Leveson report could be "achieved other than by statute,
then we are certainly open to that" and this will be discussed at cross-party talks on Thursday.

Under the
proposals the new watchdog would be audited by a recognition panel every three years to ensure newspapers do not slide back
into a culture that could spawn another scandal such as phone hacking.

This "verifying" body would be
established by a royal charter, which could be amended at any point by the privy council which is made up of cabinet ministers.

The much mooted clause which would protect the charter from politically-motivated amendments through the Privy Council
did not make it through to the final draft.

Instead, the proposals including a complicated set of clauses which
guarantee that the recognition body could not amend the royal charter without written approval from the three main parties
in the Commons and the support of two thirds of the members of both the lower house and the Lords.

The Tory proposals
offer the first details on how the press regulator's recognition panel would operate and the regulatory authority it verifies.

The board of the recognition panel will have up to eight members, none of whom can be news publishers or civil servants.
A separate appointments committee, chaired by Lord Brown, justice of the supreme court, will determine the makeup of the panel
and of consist four members – including one representing publishers, one representing the public and one public appointments
assessor. Serving editors or politicians will not be allowed to sit on this committee.

The Tory proposals also
include some fresh thinking on the regulatory body to replace the Press Complaints Commission. It will be able to investigate
third-party complaints and it will also have the power to regulate "a website containing news-related material",
such as the Huffington Post or the Guido Fawkes blog.

It also gives outsiders the first opportunity to be involved
in drawing up the code of practice for journalists covering everything from accuracy to privacy. This has up to now been the
exclusive preserve of editors.

The new watchdog will also be required to provide an arbitration process in relation
to civil claims for alleged libel and privacy breaches.

Miller said the proposals would allow the Leveson principles
to be implemented swiftly and in a practical fashion. She said the royal charter "would see the toughest press regulation
this country has ever seen, without compromising press freedom".

However, Hacked Off, which has been campaigning
for press reforms, accused Cameron of selling out on his promise to protect victims of press harassment by watering down Leveson's
recommendations.

The Lib Dems gave a cautious welcome to the plans. "We have always said our preferred option
is to implement what Leveson suggested – a system of independent self-regulation backed by statute. But we are also
clear that, as both Leveson and the victims have called for, the best outcome would be to move forward with cross-party agreement,"
said a spokesman.

Hacked Off said the Tories undermined several key Leveson recommendations including the one calling
for appointments to be made "without any influence from industry or government". The royal charter gives the industry
a veto over appointments, changing this to without "direction from industry".

The campaign group said
that the royal charter also "obliterates" the independence of the regulatory board by watering down the rules over
its membership.

Hacked Off also said the charter omits any mention of corrections and apologies, something that
concerned Leveson, who found that newspapers had in the past tried to "resist or dismiss complainants almost as a matter
of course".

Publishers who want to avoid large fines will be able to do so by creating a corporate vehicle
"for their convenience", Hacked Off said.

It is understood that Oliver Letwin, Cameron's chief policy
adviser, told Hacked Off at a briefing today that the Tory party weakened a number of clauses in its draft proposal at the
request of the newspaper industry.

Gerry McCann, father of missing girl Madeleine said this was "shocking".
He added: "The Conservative party can't rewrite Leveson now. They must think again."

Madeleine McCann's father says nothing less than making Lord Leveson's full recommendations law will satisfy
press abuse victims.

12:29pm UK, Wednesday 13 February
2013

By Dr Gerry McCann

It's two and a half months on
from Lord Justice Leveson publishing his report and we can see precious little progress in implementing it.

Our elected politicians face a critical choice.

They can either do what Leveson recommends - wholeheartedly and
properly - or they can turn their backs on the issue, and turn their backs on us, the victims of press abuse.

What
Lord Leveson proposed is not tough on the press and it's not a threat to free speech.

For me personally, he
did not go far enough. The press will still regulate themselves, something very few industries are allowed to do, and which
many people felt they had lost the right to do.

But Leveson said that it was essential that the body carrying out
the checks is set up in statute to ensure that from then on it, and the press, will be completely free of political influence.

Anything less than Leveson's full recommendations will never satisfy the victims of press abuse.

Kate and Gerry McCann suffered
"the worst the press could throw at us"This Royal Charter plan falls far short of Leveson and
it is shocking that ministers are admitting that they made a host of concessions to newspaper editors and proprietors. The
Conservative Party can't rewrite Leveson now. They must think again.

And, judging by the opinion polls, the
public feels the same way.

Kate and I had the misfortune to suffer the worst that the press could throw at us.
What happened to us could happen to any other family. That is why Kate and I put ourselves through the ordeal of giving evidence
to Leveson and why I am speaking out again today.

Nobody should have to endure what we went through.

It
is up to our Prime Minister and our other politicians to prevent that. The Prime Minister said "we will have to be guided
by what the inquiry finds".

Now he needs to put those findings, Leveson's recommendations, into law through
parliament, without meddling and back-door deals. And without checking whether the press is happy about it.

Leveson
without the law is no change. It's the Press Complaints Commission all over again. It's the world we know, of newspapers
abusing innocent families with impunity.

Lord Leveson's proposals should be made law "without checking whether the press is happy", Mr McCann tells
Sky.

2:41pm UK, Wednesday 13 February
2013

The father of missing Madeleine McCann has told Sky News that the Government should put Lord
Leveson's recommendations into law "without meddling and back-door deals".

Writing for Sky
News Online, Dr Gerry McCann said: "Anything less than Leveson's full recommendations will never satisfy the victims
of press abuse."

Dr McCann and his wife Kate gave evidence to Lord Justice Leveson's inquiry into press
standards and ethics about their treatment by the media following the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine in May 2007.

She disappeared from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, shortly before her fourth birthday and the family
has been the subject of high-profile press coverage ever since.

The McCanns were among dozens of witnesses who
gave evidence to Lord Leveson in the wake of the 2011 phone-hacking scandal which ultimately led to the closure of the News
Of The World Sunday tabloid.

The Leveson Report proposed that a new press regulator needed statutory underpinning
if it were to be truly independent.

But Prime Minister David Cameron has argued against the need for new legislation
to bring the press to heel.

The Conservatives have unveiled plans for a Royal Charter which Culture Secretary Maria
Miller said would allow the principles in Lord Leveson's report to be "implemented swiftly and in a practical fashion".

She said: "I have grave concerns about a press bill and am not convinced that it is necessary on the grounds
of principle, practicality or necessity."

But Dr McCann, who is active in the Hacked Off campaign, was critical
of the charter proposal saying: "The Conservative party can't rewrite Leveson now."

Hacked Off earlier
dismissed the Charter plan as "a surrender to press pressure" and reiterated its call for Lord Leveson's recommendations
to be implemented in full.

David Cameron should implement Leveson
in full, says Labour, 13 February 2013

David Cameron should implement Leveson in full, says
Labour The Guardian

Tory plans for new regulator backed by royal charter would threaten press freedom, opposition claims

Lisa O'CarrollWednesday 13 February 2013 14.39 GMT

The Labour party has called on the government to implement the
full Leveson report amid "a growing impatience" for a new press regulator in the wake of the News of the World phone-hacking
scandal.

Harriet Harman, the Labour deputy leader and shadow culture secretary, said in a Commons debate on Wednesday
that Lord Justice Leveson's November report on the future of press regulation, including a proposal for statutory underpinning
for a new industry watchdog, was vital to ensure "what the press did to the Dowlers, the McCanns and Abigail Witchell's
families can never happen again".

"It must be the full Leveson report, not Leveson lite," she added.

She criticised the Conservative party's plans to establish a new regulator backed by a royal charter, saying there
was nothing in the proposals published on Wednesday which prevented a future government interfering in regulation of the press,
something that would threaten its independence after hundreds of years of freedom.

"Through the privy council,
ministers would be able to tamper with the royal charter at any time," said Harman.

The Labour party also
said it is unhappy with the press having a saying in the appointments process for the new watchdog.

In response,
the culture secretary, Maria Miller, declared that Harman "can take it from the Conservative party that we would never
want to tamper with a royal charter".

The culture secretary said the new system, involving fines of up to
£1m and exemplary damages for breaches of privacy by the press would make the proposed new regulatory regime among the
"toughest in the world".

Miller said she was pleased to see that the Tory plans for a royal charter were
not "wholeheartedly rejected" by Labour and hoped to see progress towards an agreement through cross-party talks
due to take place on Thursday.

Jack Straw, the former Labour home secretary, called on Miller to implement Leveson's
recommendations on changes to the Data Protection Act and to bring in a new legislation which would make two-year jail sentences
mandatory for breaches of these privacy laws.

Straw said fears that the new data law was aimed at journalists were
misplaced as the statute proposed would be accompanied by a public interest defence and the real targets were companies unscrupulously
trading in private data.

Miller said the government would be looked at the DPA in the context of upcoming European
legislation.

KATE and Gerry McCann will make a high-profile broadcast on BBC One's Andrew Marr show today as they pray for Scotland
Yard detectives to make a breakthrough in the case of their missing daughter Madeleine.

By:
James MurrayPublished: Sun, February 17, 2013

Heart specialist Mr McCann, 44, and his wife, also 44, will have
a five-minute interview with Radio Four presenter Eddie Mair about their views on how the press should be regulated.

They have been calling for the full implementation of the Leveson report on press standards, including state underpinning,
rather than the suggested royal charter.

Their decision to step again into the media spotlight comes at a crucial
time in Scotland Yard's investigative review of their daughter's disappearance in May 2007 on the Algarve when she
was three.

Detectives have spent 20 months poring over every detail of the case but have not made the vital breakthrough
in determining what happened to the McCanns' eldest child. At Christmas the couple said they had been "impressed
and encouraged" by the Yard's work so far and hoped the Portuguese authorities would re-open the case.

Last
March the McCanns' independent private investigation was put on hold for the duration of the Yard's review, which
has so far cost more than £1million.

Scotland Yard says there is no "time frame" for its review
but officers are widely expected to make a statement on how far they have got around May 3, the anniversary of Madeleine's
disappearance.

Kate is hoping for a "special 2013" and the couple want the Yard to continue investigating
because they believe this offers the best chance of finding their daughter.

If the Yard announces in May that it
has taken its review as far as it can go then the McCanns will have to consider how they will relaunch their costly private
­investigation.

Eddie Mair: [to camera]In May 2007, a trip to the sun turned an anonymous British family into
people who were nationally and internationally known. Kate and Gerry McCann's eldest daughter Madeleine went missing in
Portugal.

[voice over archive footage] Initial media support turned into suspicion. The McCanns privacy was treated
with contempt by sections of the press who stopped at nothing to write something, anything, about the couple.

When
they attended the Leveson Inquiry, the McCanns were clear on why they had decided to take part.

[Clips from
Leveson Inquiry]

Gerry McCann: A system has to be put in place to protect ordinary people from
the damage that the media can cause.

Kate McCann: When it's your voice against a powerful
media, you know, it... it just doesn't hold weight and you know we are desperately shouting out internally – 'please
stop what you are doing' You know we are trying to find our daughter, and you are stopping our chances of finding her.

Among
the worst offenders were the Express Group, the McCanns were shown some of their stories.

Gerry McCann:
That is nothing short of disgusting.

Kate McCann: I think this same journalist, if memory serves
right, also said we stored her body in a freezer.

The News of the World also got hold of a copy of Kate McCanns
private diary, and published it without telling her.

Kate McCann: It was my only way of communicating
with Madeleine and for me, you know, there was absolutely no respect shown for me as a grieving mother or as a human being.

By
taking part in Leveson the McCanns hoped that their testimony would bring about a change a change in the Law, a new press
regulator with legal backing.

BACK TO STUDIO

Eddie Mair: Kate and
Gerry McCann, you heard John Witherow, errr... just now, editor of the Times, former editor of the Sunday Times, saying that
from all his private discussions it seems like, errr... the political parties are coalescing around this Royal Charter idea.
If that's what we end up with, was going to Leveson a waste of your time?

Gerry McCann: I
think it certainly won't be what we were hoping to achieve and very much disagree with John that, errr... that this is...
what Leveson is tough. I think Leveson has actually been quite generous to the press, and, errm... more than their behaviour,
or certain sections of the media deserve really. Errm... They're getting a last chance at self-regulation, errr... which
for me was actually a step too far.

Eddie Mair: Could you explain from your point of view what's
the practical difference between what Leveson wanted and what is now, what seems to be the compromise, what difference does
that make?

Gerry McCann: I've got three concerns at the minute, the first is the transparency.
The inquiry was open you could see what was going on. Leveson's reviewed all the evidence, errr... and what's happened
in the last two and a half month's is exactly what you've talked about, where we're having a number of private
meetings; the minutes are not published; the discussions are not published, and then that leads to serious concerns about
independence of what is being proposed, because a major part of Leveson was acknowledging that the press had got too close
to politicians.

And the third concern for us, in what is being proposed, is that we're going to end up with,
errr... sub-Leveson recommendations really, errm... particularly around independence, errr... both of the... the Board who
are going to oversee it, and the fact that there should be complete independence of the appointments of that Board.

Eddie Mair: I am struck by something, errr... you are quoted as saying, errr... Gerry –

"The Leveson package, including legal underpinning is the mimimum acceptable compromise for us."

I just wonder, if it was up to you, if they gave you the power to draft something; the future of the press, what would you
do?

Gerry McCann: To be honest, I've already said this to you that, errr... I feel that the...
the press has lost its entitlement to self-regulation over many, many years and I would have liked to have seen actually statutory
regulation and not self-regulation.

Eddie Mair: But I get the impression if it was up to you,
you would go much further…

Gerry McCann: Oh, asolutely...

Eddie Mair:
People might not blame you, what would you do?

Gerry McCann: Well no, I would make it
very much that they weren't... that it wasn't self-regulated, it would be independent regulation.

Kate
McCann: I think when we saw, errr... the Leveson recommendations we probably thought for us it was probably a 7 out
of 10. And obviously it's been a pain staking process and I think Lord Leveson has come up with something that’s
very balanced and he's trying to be as fair as possible to every party involved. But actually I think what the Government
are proposing with this Charter, which I have to say, a Charter body is overseen by Ministers for a start, which again
takes away the independence. Errm... It's basically a compromise of a compromise...

Gerry McCann:
Yeah.

Kate McCann: And why... why do the press, why do the Government what... not want to be accountable
like everybody else? I mean the press are the first to hold people in authority to account.

Eddie Mair:
Have you noticed any improvement in the press since Leveson?

Gerry McCann: It's very difficult
to say that because you only know, errr... about your own individual circumstances..

Eddie Mair: But
even there. I mean, have things been better?

Gerry McCann: Obviously the situation for us, we
still have, errr... episodes where things are published which we would much prefer weren't published, errm...
there's been a recent headline; front page of a Sunday newspaper, about a potential lead in Madeleine's case and it
hadn't been fully explored, and it's something that we raised at Leveson, that Madeleine and her safety is often treated
with complete contempt. And we have no re-dress currently, and I would have concerns that if the editors get what they want,
which is how complaints are dealt with, it would only be certain complaints and they could decide which ones would
come. And one of the things we are very, very concerned with... and is about accuracy and standards and consideration for
the public. We want the regulator to be able to protect the interests of the public.

Eddie Mair:
And the recent story about Madeleine that you were unhappy with did you... did you try and speak to the... to the paper concerned.

Kate McCann: Yeah, I... I wrote to the editor of the newspaper and explained my concerns and I have
to say I got a reply back which made my blood boil. It was basically telling me that he... they knew what was best for Madeleine;
that they knew best what was for missing children. So despite what we as parents thought, despite what the Metropolitan police
thought, they knew what was best, and that is really concerning, post-Leveson Inquiry, that this is the kind of response we're
getting. I believe if the Royal Charter goes through we'll be no better off and this is one opportunity now which might
not come again, and I think the general public deserve to know what's happening, because as Gerry said, there's been
a total lack of transparency, and what the Government is proposing is not what Leveson has proposed.

Eddie
Mair: Do you have much hope that the change you want will come in?

Gerry McCann: I...
I've not given up hope. I think the first thing is to... I think the vast majority of MP's actually are fully supportive
of Leveson, and I've mentioned this before, but if, errr... our Parliamentarians want to redeem themselves in the public
light, they know that the right thing is to implement Leveson in full. Not a compromise, not a sop to the editors.

Kate and Gerry McCann call on government to abandon proposal for royal charter and introduce statutory regulation

Shiv Malik and agenciesSunday 17 February 2013 12.29 GMT

The press has lost its entitlement to self-regulate and the government's
post-Leveson proposals are a "compromise of a compromise", the parents of missing child Madeleine McCann have said.

Last week, the government said it would not introduce new legislation to regulate the press but would instead push
ahead with a watchdog underpinned by royal charter to avoid conflicts around media freedom.

Gerry McCann said the
government should reverse its decision and introduce statutory regulation so as not to leave the public bereft of protection.

Speaking on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show, he also criticised the government's process for responding to Lord
Justice Leveson's findings, which he said ran contrary to the inquiry.

"A major part of Leveson was acknowledging
that the press has got too close to politicians," he said. Yet ahead of the government's response, editors and ministers
were "having a number of private meetings, the minutes are not published, the discussions are not published …
That leads to serious concerns about the independence of what's been proposed".

"They [the press]
are getting a last chance at self-regulation … [it is] a step too far," he said.

Madeleine was nearly
four when she vanished from her family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in the Algarve, where she had been left by
her parents as they dined at a tapas restaurant with friends nearby on 3 May 2007.

Leveson cited the coverage of
her disappearance as an example of how stories ran "totally out of control".

Kate McCann described the
Leveson inquiry as "a painstaking process" but said the judge's final proposals were balanced and fair to all
parties. She said, however, that in a chartered watchdog, the government had offered a "compromise of a compromise".

"Why do the press not want to be accountable like everyone else? The press are the first to hold people in authority
to account."

The McCanns also spoke about a recent dispute with a newspaper editor, following the publication
of a story involving a police lead that they said had "not been fully explored" and that they did not want published.

"It is something we raised at Leveson that Madeleine and her safety is often treated with complete contempt,"
Gerry McCann said.

"I wrote to the editor of the newspaper and explained my concerns," Kate McCann said.
"And I have to say I got a reply back which made my blood boil. It was basically telling me that they knew what was best
for Madeleine, that they knew what was best for missing children so despite what we as parents thought, despite what the Metropolitan
police thought, they knew what was best.

"And that is really concerning, post-Leveson inquiry, that this is
the kind of response we are getting. I believe if the royal charter goes through, we'll not be better off and this is
one opportunity that might not come again."

Earlier, John Witherow, the acting editor of the Times and a former
long-serving editor of the Sunday Times, told presenter Eddie Mair that the proposal for a royal charter "had teeth"
and took in many of Leveson's recommendations without the need for legislation.

Proposals to back new press regulations with a Royal Charter are "a
compromise of a compromise", the parents of missing Madeleine McCann have said.

Kate and Gerry McCann
said what the government was proposing was not what the Leveson report had recommended.

The Conservatives said
their plans for a regulatory system which would be "tough" and effective and have received a cautious welcome from
other parties.

Mr McCann said the press had "lost its entitlement to self regulation."

He
said: "I think Leveson has been quite generous to the press and more than the behaviour of some sections of the media
deserve really.

"They are getting a last chance at self-regulation which for me was actually a step too far."

He added: "I feel that the press has lost its entitlement to self-regulation over many, many years and I would
have liked to have seen statutory regulation, not self-regulation."

When the McCanns appeared before Lord
Justice Leveson's inquiry into press standards in November 2011, Mr McCann gave evidence of what he and his wife Kate
called the "disgusting" and "offensive" stories written about them.

Speaking on the BBC's
Andrew Marr show on Sunday, the couple said stories that jeopardised their daughter's safety were still being published.

Mr McCann, of Rothley, Leics, said: "We still have episodes where things are published which we'd prefer
not to be.

"Madeleine and her safety is often treated with complete contempt."

Mrs McCann
said she wrote to a newspaper which had published such a story to complain and the response she got back made her "blood
boil".

Madeleine disappeared when she was three years old in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in May 2007.

In November, the report on press standards by Lord Justice Leveson - commissioned in the wake of the phone-hacking scandal
- recommended an independent, self-regulatory watchdog for the press that would be backed by legislation.

The Conservatives
opposed regulation backed up by statute, arguing a Royal Charter was the right way to provide legal backing for any new press
regulator.

Both the Liberal Democrats and Labour supported the Leveson report's conclusion that legislation
was necessary, but are reportedly close to agreeing on adopting a Royal Charter instead.

Royal Charters are formal
documents that have been used to establish and lay out the terms of organisations, including the BBC and the Bank of England,
and cannot be changed without government approval.

Bob Satchwell, executive director of the Society of Editors,
said he sympathised with Kate and Gerry McCann and acknowledged they were correctly compensated under libel laws but disagreed
with their views on new press regulation plans.

"They are wrong to think that the tough new self-regulatory
regime requires a statute," he told BBC News.

"Lord Justice Leveson recognised that the vast majority
of journalists were blameless but all will face new and powerful regulation.

"There are complex practical
and legal issues in implementing the new system but the Leveson pathway will be closely followed."

He added
the Royal Charter would be in place to ensure the system was independent and not to exercise control itself.

"The
Leveson principles are not being undermined and the provisions of the strict new system, with fines of up to £1m, demonstrate
that the press has not been let off any hooks."

Press regulation needs consensus, not
a flimsy solution pegged to a libel bill, 24 February 2013

Press regulation needs consensus, not a flimsy solution
pegged to a libel bill The Guardian

Lord Puttnam and friends have done us no favours by attaching Leveson's reforms to measures going through parliament

Peter PrestonThe Observer,
Sunday 24 February 2013

The difficulty is treating Leveson as though it were Old Testament
doctrine in some holy war. There isn't, in truth, a huge difference between a royal charter approach and statutory underpinning,
the divide that so consumes our cud-chewing politicians. Think shades of grey in a pretty bleak landscape. No one (least of
all the PCC's toiling Lord Hunt) doubts something pretty draconian will emerge in the end. There is no escape hatch in
sight. But fundamentalism of the Hacked Off variety can hinder as well as help.

Lord Puttnam and friends haven't
assisted one jot by tacking their flimsy, swiftly amended version of Leveson's light-touch arbitration tribunals onto
a passing defamation bill. Real experts – such as Lord Lester QC – think it an abomination likely to be overturned
in Strasbourg anyway, and certain to befoul libel reform itself. Experienced crime correspondents– such as the Guardian's
Duncan Campbell – think a deep freeze on contacts between press and police is sure to be used to hide police misconduct
and thus do the public interest no favours whatsoever. If everything is couched in terms of Murdoch-hating in particular,
or tabloid-hating in general, then where do hundreds of blameless regional papers fit in? No wonder they're anxious about
shoals of fee-hungry lawyers heading their way.

We'll know a bit more tomorrow, as the defamation bill survives
– or tragically sinks. But meanwhile there's every reason to grow reflective. Would heightened regulation have stopped
phone hacking? Probably, to a degree: though remember the law didn't do the job. Would it have eased the plight of victims
in the Christopher Jefferies or McCann category? Certainly not in the beginning, after Jefferies was arrested in the Joanna
Yates case or the McCanns declared suspects in Madeleine's disappearance.

Both of those calls, as we soon found
out, were wrong. Jefferies was entirely innocent: a dud arrest. And the McCanns' status was dropped after nine months.
But how is a standards board sitting in London supposed to rule quickly about such cases? The police don't always make
wrong arrests: grieving parents aren't always what they seem. Remember Shannon Matthews and her mother's tearful TV
pleas? How quickly would a regulator have wanted to step in there – and look ridiculous when what really happened to
Shannon stood revealed? Press regulation needs agreeing and embracing by all sides – it took four years in Ireland!
– not enforcing so crudely that it's as resented and therefore as frail as its first inevitable debacle.